5 talking points from Australia-India 2nd ODI

Rohit Sharma’s second-successive century went in vain as Australia cruised to their target with an over to spare in the second ODI of the five-match series in Brisbane.After winning the toss, India’s decision to bat looked lilke the right one at the 40th over as they had two set batsmen in Ajinkya Rahane and Rohit Sharma. But once the latter departed for 124, India stumbled their way to 308/8, scoring just 75 from their last 10 overs.In response, Australia’s openers all but ensured another win, as they put on 145 for the first wicket. In the end, three batsmen scored seventies as Australia reached their target with seven wickets in hand and an over to spare.Here are the major talking points from the game.

#1 India\'s death-over dilemma

Should India consider promoting Dhoni up and grooming finishers at No.5 and 6?

Death overs have always been India’s scourge. Earlier, it used to be with the ball, when they failed to contain the rampaging batsmen, but now it seems as though the batting has caught the curse.

After 40 overs, with the score at 233/2 and two set batsmen, one on a hundred and the other a run away from a fifty, the bare minimum India should have managed is 320. Given the current scoring rates, some might say that is being generous, but still, given the lack of firepower, that was a reasonable score to have gotten on a featherbed.

Instead, after Rohit Sharma’s wicket, India stuttered and stumbled their way to 308/8, managing a mere 75 tuns in the final 10 overs, losing six wickets in the process.

Ajinkya Rahane did his best to increase the scoring, but given he is more of an opener than a finisher, it was too much to ask of him. MS Dhoni's big-hitting seems to have deserted him and neither Manish Pandey nor Ravindra Jadeja could provide the final flourish India needed.

So should India seriously consider playing Dhoni at No.4, have a couple of big-hitters behind him? That is certainly a question the selectors will be asking themselves after the second ODI.

#2 Batsmen continue to dominate

Rohit Sharma scored his second-successive century

Scoring runs in Australia used to be so hard that every century an Indian batsman scored was a memory that would come to be cherished forever. But given the rate at which Rohit Sharma is racking up centuries, one wonders if even he will remember how many hundreds he got and where at the end of his career.

That point has nothing to with Rohit and everything to do with the surfaces on offer down-under. In Perth, what once used to be “the fastest wicket in the world” was a placid, flat track where 300 was scored by both teams with little trouble. Brisbane was very similar, as it offered next to nothing for the bowlers.

The fact that scores of 310 are under-par suggests just how much the game is skewed in favour of the batsmen. While Australia aren’t the only country guilty of producing flat tracks, it is certainly a worry as such tracks will all but kill any dreams a kid has of becoming a bowler.

#3 Should India continue to persist with spin-duo?

Should India drop one of these two?

Given Australia have all but decided to serve up flat tracks for the ODI series, India's decision to play two front-line spinners continues to be a bit puzzling. On flat decks, where there is little swing or spin, you either need to have express pace or have plenty of variety to succeed.

Towards the end of the innings, James Faulkner showed that slower balls can deceive even set batsmen and although neither team has a bowler that can consistently bowl over 150 kmph, the former is an option India can certainly take on tracks that offer nothing for the bowlers.

After an outstanding series against South Africa on conducive pitches, Jadeja and Ashwin have struggled so far. And in this match, went for 110 runs, while picking up just one wicket from their 19 overs.

While it is unlikely India are going to contemplate dropping either spinners, perhaps they should reconsider seeing as pitches aren’t offering anything for them.

#4 Costly drop(s)

Ishant dropped a dolly at the start of the Australian innings

Catches win matches isn’t just a cliche that is often doled out by commentators who are too bored to make an insightful remark about the game. Sometimes, it is also true.

Whether India would have won the game if Ishant Sharma had held onto that catch off Shaun Marsh on 19, when Australia were on 48/0 after 12.1 overs is debatable, but it would have certainly changed the complexion of the run chase as the pair then went on to add another 98 runs before the first wicket fell.

Marsh lived a charmed life, as he was dropped, not once, not twice, but thrice. Although Rahane’s drop, if you call it that, is harsh considering he was barely a few meters away and he slashed at the ball, but the one Manish Pandey dropped at first slip, certainly was something he should have hung on to.

India’s fielding was unusually poor and that wasn’t just their catching. In fact, their ground fielding and their inability to hit the stumps with their throws, certainly cost them a chance to be level in the series.

Although Barinder Sran almost pulled off a blinder off Marsh at fine leg, the standard of Indian fielding hasn’t been especially high, on this tour so far.

#5 Did India make the right call?

If the bowling is weak, why not trust the batsmen?

At the end of the game, MS Dhoni said: "Seems as if we have to score more runs and that puts a lot of pressure on the batsman. Back to back 300 is always good, but looking at our bowlers, we need to score 330 or more. Looking at everything we have to score 330-plus to make a game out of it.”

His words, in no uncertain terms, show how much trust he has, in his bowlers. He has already complained about the lack of a genuine all-rounder after decent batting efforts in both matches, he has taken to criticising the bowlers, on what was, to be fair, flat tracks.

All of which begs the question, why did India decided to bat first, when no target is apparently big enough for the bowlers they currently have? In both matches, India won the toss and elected to bat first, which seems counter-productive when you take into consideration, how weak the bowling is.

If batting is the team's strong suit, why not back it? Why not bowl first and trust the batsmen to chase down whatever target is set? After all, that is just what Australia have been doing and look what it has done for them.